UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 


Class 

'i'iS.I 


Book  Volume 

CVls 


Je  07-10M 


Socialism  and  its  Practical 
Aims  in  England 

A  LECTURE  DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE 


SOCIAL  SCIENCE  ASSOCIATION 

At  Saratoga  Springs,  Sept.  6,  1889, 

Anc$  with  a  Few  Modifications  and  Additions,  at 

THE  CHICAGO  ECONOMIC  CONFERENCE 

Dec.  22,  1889 


BY 

PERCIVAL  CHUBB 

MEMBER  OF  THE  FABIAN  SOCIETY,  LONDON,  ENG. 


ON  SALE  AT 

The  Office  of  “The  Dawn,”  36  Bromfield  St.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Price  10  cents ,  post  free 


Socialism  and  its  Practical 
Aims  in  England 

A  LECTURE  DELIVERED  BEFORE  THE 

SOCIAL  SCIENCE  ASSOCIATION 

At  Saratoga  Springs,  Sept.  6,  1889, 

And,  with  a  Few  Modifications  and  Additions,  at 

THE  CHICAGO  ECONOMIC  CONFERENCE 

Dec.  22,  1889 


BY 

PERCIVAL  CHUBB 


MEMBER  OF  THE  FABIAN  SOCIETY,  LONDON,  ENG. 


ON  SALE  AT 

The  Office  of  “The  Dawn,”  36  Bromfield  St.,  Boston,  Mass. 
Price  10  cents ,  post  free 


This  lecture  is  issued  in  pamphlet  form,  to  meet  the  wishes  of  some  people 
who  heard  it  in  Chicago.  Those  who  are  familiar  with  English  Socialism  will, 
I  suspect,  find  little  or  nothing  in  it  that  is  new.  Those  to  whom  the  subject 
is  fresh  need  to  be  warned  that  my  very  brief  presentation  of  it  necessarily 
leaves  many  important  items  and  aspects  of  Socialist  doctrine  untouched. 
They  should  also  bear  in  mind  that  I  have  often  been  obliged  to  be  curtly 
dogmatic  in  my  statements  where  I  should  have  preferred  to  be  argumentative. 

There  is  one  aspect  of  Socialism  —  the  moral  aspect  —  upon  which  I  have 
been  able  to  say  little  in  my  lecture.  If  it  were  possible  to  treat  this  with 
brevity,  I  should  be  induced  to  write  a  few  supplementary  pages  upon  it.  But 
the  issues  are  too  wide  and  too  numerous.  A  satisfactory  treatment  of  the 
question  would  have  to  include  a  consideration  of  the  relation  of  economic 
reform  to  moral  reform, —  the  relation,  that  is,  of  the  forces  of  character  and  of 
gircumstances ;  of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to  society  and  the  State;  of  the 
moral  value  of  competition  and  the  distinction  between  individualism  and 
individuality;  of  the  moral  basis  of  property;  of  the  moral  criterion  of  work 
and  i's  claims  to  reward.  As  I  cannot  deal  with  these  questions  here,  I  content 
myself  with  remarking  that  it  is  fully  recognized  that  these  are  the  vital  issues 
of  Socialism ;  and  that,  if  Socialism  is  regarded  as  a  mere  gospel  of  economic 
proprieties,  its  scope  and  significance  are  misunderstood. 

The  forces  behind  the  Socialist  movement  in  England  and  throughout 
Europe  are  not  only  the  forces  of  poverty  and  of  a  deeper  sympathy  with 
poverty,  but  the  forces  of  a  democratic  revolt  against  class  distinctions  and 
class  domination;  of  a  growing  aspiration  among  the  people  for  larger  oppor¬ 
tunities  of  growth ;  of  reaction  against  the  vulgar  materialism  which  has  flooded 
our  civilization,  against  the  degradation  of  the  arts,  and  the  commercial  spolia¬ 
tion  of  natural  beauty  and  the  comeliness  of  town  surroundings. 

This  century  has  witnessed  the  rise  of  the  English  and  European  “middle 
class”  into  affluence  and  power.  The  “working  class”  now  demands  its  wider 
chances,  and  many  of  the  “  middle  class  ”  have  come  forward  to  assist  in  urging 
this  claim  and  in  abolishing  class  distinctions  forever.  And  why  ?  First  of  all 
because  justice  and  honor  and  humanity  call  upon  them;  but  also  because  they 
see  that  the  emancipation  of  the  worker  is  the  condition  of  the  emancipation 
of  civilization  from  the  bonds  of  moral,  intellectual,  artistic,  and  literary  debase¬ 
ment.  Our  ruling  inequalities  of  condition  and  opportunity,  and  the  greedy 
struggle  for  riches  by  which  they  are  maintained,  must  be  got  rid  of,  if  we  are 
to  build  up  a  worthy  and  admirable  civilization. 

Socialism,  then,  makes  its  appeal  to  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men  and 
women.  It  is  not  a  doctrine  of  levelling  down,  but  of  levelling  up, —  a  levelling 
up  of  the  rich  as  well  as  the  poor  to  a  plane  of  juster  and  nobler  living. 

Those  who  desire  a  fuller  account  of  the  Socialist  movement  in  England 
are  recommended  to  consult  the  pamphlet  entitled  “Socialism  in  England,”  by 
Sidney  Webb,  included  among  the  publications  of  the  American  Economic 
Association.  p.  c. 


New  York ,  February,  1890. 


Commerce.  «  6^0^.  0  6  S. 


SOCIALISM  AND  ITS  PRACTICAL  AIMS  IN 
ENGLAND. 


In  spite  of  all  the  fashionable  writing  and  talking  about  Social¬ 
ism,  such  false  and  imperfect  notions  of  what  it  means  are  still  qt 
large,  that  I  shall  venture  to  preface  what  I  have  to  say  about  the 
practical  aims  of  its  English  advocates  by  a  short  exposition  of  its 
theory  and  purpose. 

Socialism  professes  to  find  a  clew  to,  and  a  cure  for,  the  poverty 
which  is  almost  everywhere  the  distressing  accompaniment  of 
modern  civilization.  It  is  but  a  few  years  back  that  Christendom, 
relying  on  that  misunderstood  saying  of  its  founder,  “  The  poor  ye 
have  always  with  you,”  accepted  poverty  as  a  divine  necessity, —  a 
discipline  for  the  poor  and  a  field  of  charity  for  the  rich.  Even 
now  it  is  quite  commonly  believed  that  poverty,  while  it  may  be 
mitigated,  and  perhaps  effectually  relieved,  by  organized  charity, — 
i.e.,  charity  officialized  and  administered  with  a  minimum  of  com¬ 
passion, —  can  never  be  wholly  abolished.  But  society  has  from 
time  to  time  been  startled  out  of  its  complacent  toleration  of  pov¬ 
erty  by  reformers  who  preached  a  seeming  way  of  escape  from  it ; 
and  now  Socialism,  professing  to  base  itself  on  science  and  history, 
affirms  that  poverty  is  a  perfectly  explicable  disease  of  the  social 
body,  a  disease  which  has  its  chief  cause  in  irrational  and  iniqui¬ 
tous  social  laws  and  institutions,  and  is  to  be  cured  through  the 
application  of  a  modicum  of  justice,  reason,  and  good-will  to  the 
diseased  body. 

That  this  conclusion  has  not  sooner  been  arrived  at  must  be 
ascribed  to  men’s  ignorance  of  the  real  condition  of  things.  No 
reasonable  person  can  face  the  array  of  statistics  now  available  as 
to  the  facts  of  social  life  without  coming  to  the  conclusion  that 
there  is  some  fundamental  flaw  in  our  social  system.  He  can 
hardly  study  those  statistics  thoroughly  and  disinterestedly  without 
gaining  some  insight  into  the  causes  of  the  evils,  and  the  direction 
in  which  a  remedy  must  be  sought. 

olS'bZS 


4 


Let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  a  few  of  the  more  salient  facts 
which  recent  inquiry  has  brought  to  light.  They  shall  be  facts  of 
the  life  of  London,  where  I  myself  have  lived  :  — 

One  out  of  four  of  the  whole  population  is  computed  to  be 
earning  —  and  that  irregularly — not  more  than  a  guinea  a  week 
per  family ;  and  over  a  third  of  these  are  receiving  much  less,  and, 
says  Mr.  Booth,  “live  in  a  state  of  chronic  want”  (p.  33  of  “Life 
and  Labor  in  East  London  ”).  This  corresponds  to  the  proportion 
indicated  by  the  statistics  of  mortality.  In  London  one  person  in 
every  five  will  die  in  the  workhouse,  hospital,  or  lunatic  asylum. 
In  1887,  out  of  82,545  deaths  in  London,  43,507  being  over 
twenty,  9,399  were  in  workhouses,  7,201  in  hospitals,  and  400  in 
lunatic  asylums,  or  altogether  17,000  in  public  institutions  (Regis¬ 
trar-General’s  Report,  1888,  C. —  5,  138,  pp.  2  and  73).  Consider¬ 
ing  that  comparatively  few  of  these  are  children,  it  is  probable 
that  one  in  every  three  London  adults  will  be  driven  into  these 
refuges  to  die  ;  and  the  proportion  in  the  case  of  the  manual  labor 
class  must,  of  course,  be  much  greater.  One  in  eleven  of  the 
whole  metropolitan  population  is  driven  to  accept  Poor  Law  relief 
during  any  one  year  (see  p.  20),  and  that  notwithstanding  the  ex¬ 
istence  of  organized  metropolitan  charities  estimated  to  disburse 
over  ^4,000,000  annually  (Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  vol.  xiv.  p. 
833),  and  that  in  Middlesex  and  Surrey  there  were  in  1888  1,152,- 
189  Post-office  Savings  Bank  accounts  open,  with  an  aggregate 
balance  of  ^15,410,541  (H.C.  177  of  1889).  spite  of  all,  29 
deaths  were  referred,  in  1888,  to  direct  and  obvious  starvation 
(H.C.  Return,  No.  136,  1889).* 

It  has  been  found  that  “the  average  age  at  death  among  the 
nobility,  gentry,  and  professional  classes  in  England  and  Wales 
was  55  years;  but  among  the  artisan  class  of  Lambeth  it  only 
amounted  to  29  years ;  and,  while  the  infantile  death-rate  among 
the  well-to-do  classes  was  such  that  only  8  children  died  in  the 
first  year  of  life,  out  of  100  born,  as  many  as  30  per  cent,  suc¬ 
cumbed  at  that  age  among  the  children  of  the  poor  in  some  dis¬ 
tricts  of  our  large  cities.”  It  has  been  computed  that  from  thirty 
to  thirty-five  thousand  children  often  go  daily  to  school  without 
breakfast,  not  to  speak  of  those  who  have  been  only  scantily 
fed.  On  an  average,  from  twenty  to  twenty-five  thousand  dock 
laborers  compete,  which  means  physically  struggle,  for  employ¬ 
ment  at  the  dock  gates  for  work  at  4 d.  (8  cents)  per  hour,|  and 
that  one-third  of  them  struggle  in  vain.  These  facts  clearly  show 

*  From  “  Facts  for  Londoners,”  an  exhaustive  collection  of  statistical  and  other  facts  relating 
to  the  metropolis,  published  by  the  Fabian  Society,  63  Fleet  Street,  London.  Price  6 d. 

t  This  was  written  before  the  great  strike  had  secured  an  advance  in  the  rate  of  pay,  which  is 
still  shamefully  low. 


5 


that  our  social  system  —  if  such  a  chaos  of  competition  can  be 
called  a  system  —  excludes  a  large  fraction  of  the  population  from 
the  opportunities  of  earning  a  livelihood  altogether,  and  compels 
another  large  fraction  to  work  at  mere  starvation  wages  ;  that  it 
shortens  the  life  of  this  large  fraction,  and  sends  them  to  die  in 
workhouses  and  hospitals;  half  starves,  and  often  more  than  half 
starves,  their  children,  so  that  they  are  incapable  of  receiving  even 
an  elementary  education. 

What  is  the  explanation  of  this  lack  of  employment,  this  low 
rate  of  payment,  this  murderous  poverty,  breeding  disease,  suffer¬ 
ing,  and  crime  ?  We  get  a  little  light  thrown  on  the  question  when 
we  reflect  upon  another  leading  fact  of  our  social  life ;  namely, 
that  out  of  the  total  annual  income  of  the  English  nation,  estimated 
at  ^1250  millions,  450  millions  (more  than  a  third)  go  in  rent  and 
interest  to  the  owners  of  land  and  capital.  This  is  as  much  as  the 
whole  income  of  the  manual  laborers  of  the  country,  although 
these  represent  about  five-sevenths  of  the  population.  It  ap¬ 
pears,  then,  that  out  of  the  total  annual  income  a  small  class 
are  able  by  some  means  or  other  to  appropriate  more  than  a 
third.  How  do  they  manage  to  do  it?  The  appropriation,  I 
have  said,  is  made  in  the  form  of  rent  and  interest.  Rent  is  pay¬ 
ment  to  the  owners  of  land  for  the  use  of  that  land.  Interest  is 
payment  to  the  owners  of  capital  for  the  use  of  that  capital. 
These  two  things,  land  and  capital,  being  absolutely  necessary 
to  life  and  comfort,  the  small  minority  who  monopolize  them  can, 
and  do,  extort  a  toll  from  the  non-possessing  majority  for  their 
use.  These  proletarians,  competing  with  one  another  for  places, 
under  the  fear  of  starvation,  are  driven  to  accept  the  lowest  pos¬ 
sible  wages,  and  their  productions  are  sold  for  the  highest  obtain¬ 
able  price. 

Here,  then,  says  Socialism,  is  the  economic  root  of  the  evil  of 
poverty, —  the  monopoly  by  a  small  class  of  the  means  of  life; 
namely,  the  material  and  the  instruments  essential  to  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  wealth.  This  carries  with  it  three  great  injustices  :  the 
exaction,  from  those  who  labor  to  produce  wealth,  of  part  of  the 
fruits  of  their  exertion  (more  than  one-third,  as  I  have  said) ;  the 
exclusion  of  many  from  opportunities  of  working;  and  the  exist¬ 
ence  of  an  idle,  rich,  luxurious  class.  It  implies,  too,  a  great 
class  antagonism,  due  to  the  effort  of  the  monopolists  to  extract 
all  they  can  from  the  disinherited ;  to  take  every  advantage  of  the 
latter’s  disadvantages,  so  intensifying  the  struggle  for  daily  bread. 


6 


There  are  other  evils  inseparable  from  these,  other  inequalities 
generated  by  this  fundamental  inequality,  which  are  further  proofs 
of  its  vicious  character ;  but  I  must  not  stop  to  speak  of  these  now. 

The  economic  cure  which  Socialism  prescribes  is  the  abolition 
of  this  monopoly  of  land  and  capital  by  vesting  them  in  the 
nation,  to  be  used  for  the  public  good  instead  of  for  private  gain, 
and  the  consequent  appropriation  of  rent  and  interest  by  the 
people  for  public  instead  of  private  enjoyment.  This  necessarily 
involves  the  organization  of  industry  by  the  State  ;  the  systema¬ 
tized  co-operative  production  of  the  necessaries  of  life  to  meet 
ascertained  needs,  avoiding  waste  and  disastrous  crises;  the  enrol¬ 
ment  of  every  capable  citizen  as  a  worker,  abolishing  idleness  on 
the  one  hand  and  long  and  laborious  toil  on  the  other ;  and  the 
just  distribution  among  the  workers  of  the  fruits  of  their  exertion. 

The  strength  of  the  position  thus  taken  by  Socialism  lies  in  the 
fact  that  it  advocates  a  solution  for  which  the  present  economic 
development  of  society  is  preparing  the  way,  and  indeed  will  in 
time  render  inevitable.  Industry  is  becoming  more  and  more  con¬ 
centrated  in  large  establishments,  which  are  exterminating  their 
smaller  antagonists.  Through  the  perfection  of  machinery  and 
more  minute  division  of  labor,  production  is  becoming  more  and 
more  socialized, —  a  co-operation  of  workers  constantly  increasing 
in  magnitude  and  complexity.  And  again,  through  the  combina¬ 
tion  of  productive  concerns  in  trusts  and  syndicates,  the  distrib¬ 
utive  machinery  is  becoming  more  and  more  adequate  to  the 
needs  of  consumption.  In  time,  it  certainly  must  become  clear 
that  it  is  just  and  expedient  that  these  productive  concerns  should 
be  worked  for  the  public  good  instead  of  for  private  aggrandize¬ 
ment.  The  transfer  from  private  to  public  hands  is  being  made 
easier  every  day. 

So  much,  in  brief,  for  the  economic  meaning  of  Socialism. 
Politically,  it  means  the  realization  of  a  true  democracy  based  on 
complete  civil  equality,  “a  government  of  the  people,  by  the 
people,  for  the  people,”  to  use  an  admirable  historic  phrase.  It 
does  not  contemplate  a  huge,  highly  centralized  organization  of 
society,  but  such  a  confederation  of  free  autonomous  communities 
as  will  allow  for  the  fullest  mutual  development  of  individuality 
in  communal  and  personal  life. 

Ethically  considered,  Socialism  is  the  effort  to  give  effect  to  the 
principles  of  social  morality,  theoretically  acknowledged  by  every 
professed  follower  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  that  we  should  love  our 


7 


neighbor  as  ourselves,  and  do  unto  others  as  we  would  that  they 
should  do  unto  us ;  that  the  strong  should  bear  the  infirmities  of 
the  weak  (and  not  strive  to  profit  by  these  infirmities,  which  is  the 
law  of  competition);  and  that  the  measure  of  human  worth  is 
service,  and  not  possessions.  The  basis  of  Socialist  ethics  is  none 
other  than  the  principle  implied  in  the  Golden  Rule  and  stated  in 
another  form  by  Paul,  that  we  are  members  one  of  another,  so 
that  an  injury  or  injustice  done  to  one  is  an  injury  or  injustice 
done  to  the  whole.  Socialism  affirms,  along  with  the  great 
teachers  of  all  time,  that  the  good  of  the  individual  is  conditioned 
by  and  involved  in  the  good  of  the  society  of  which  he  is  a  member; 
and  therefore  that,  in  order  that  society  may  secure  the  highest 
good  to  the  individuals  composing  it,  each  individual  must  live  for 
the  highest  good  of  society.  In  this  principle,  it  gains  at  once  the 
guide  of  conduct  and  the  inspiration  of  life.  Living  by  it,  a  man 
finds  himself  lifted  above  the  narrow  limits  of  his  private  concerns, 
to  share  in  the  larger  life  and  wider  interests  of  humanity.  From 
this  standpoint,  the  struggle  for  personal  possessions  seems  paltry 
and  foolish,  and  only  that  common  good,  which  is  a  brotherly 
co-operation  for  living  a  full  and  deep  and  beneficent  life,  worthy 
of  pursuit. 

Now,  Socialism  as  a  principle  of  social  reconstruction  and  an 
ideal  of  social  progress  must  be  the  same  for  all  peoples ;  but  it  is 
clear  that,  as  the  political  and  social  conditions  of  nations  vary 
considerably,  they  cannot  realize  the  ideal  by  identical  methods  of 
transition.  This,  at  least,  is*  the  opinion  to  which  most  Socialists 
in  England  have  been  won.  In  the  early  stages  of  the  movement 
it  was  believed  with  a  fanatical  ardor  that  the  change  from  the  old 
to  the  new  social  order  might  be  effected  by  a  sudden  and  simul¬ 
taneous  uprising  of  the  workers  of  all  the  nations.  This  belief 
still  survives,  more  especially  on  the  continent  of  Europe.  In 
England,  the  view  now  rather  prevails  that,  while  the  rich  may 
force  the  poor  to  revolutionary  measures,  the  chief  obstacle  to  the 
adoption  of  Socialism  is  not,  as  it  is  on  the  continent,  the  oppres¬ 
sion  of  a  despotic  power,  which  forbids  free  speech  and  propa¬ 
ganda,  but  the  ignorance,  prejudice,  and  inertia  of  the  people. 
True,  these  are  sad  shortcomings,  for  which  the  inhumanity  of  so¬ 
ciety  must  be  blamed ;  but  they  are  facts  which  must  be  faced 
frankly.  The  conviction  is  also  gaining  ground  that  to  make 
such  a  vast  change  as  that  from  the  regime  of  competition,  class 
distinction,  and  individualism  in  morals  to  the  regime  of  co-opera- 


8 


tion,  equality,  and  social  ethics,  suddenly,  is  a  moral  and  an  eco¬ 
nomic  impossibility ;  and  that  the  effort  to  do  so  would  be  made 
in  the  face  of  the  teaching  of  history  and  philosophy.  English 
Socialists,  or  the  great  majority  of  them,  have  therefore  taken 
to  formulating  a  scheme  of  transitional  measures,  designed  to 
lead  as  speedily  as  possible  to  the  consummation  of  their  aims, 
the  foundation  of  a  co-operative  commonwealth.  They  have,  ac¬ 
cordingly,  while  continuing  their  purely  educational  work,  entered 
the  sphere  of  political  action  with  the  object  of  forcing  their  own 
stepping-stone  measures.  Such  success  has  attended  their  early 
efforts  that  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  is  along  these  lines 
that  the  Socialist  movement  will  advance  in  the  future. 

It  would,  however,  be  unfair  to  ignore  the  significance  and  in¬ 
fluence  of  the  comparatively  small  body  of  avowedly  revolutionary 
Socialists  who  discountenance  and  hold  aloof  from  the  endeavor 
to  gain  Socialism  by  instalments  through  political  agencies.  This 
section  of  believers  in  the  possibility  of  a  sudden  transformation 
still  hopes  to  educate  and  organize  the  proletariat  of  Europe  for 
a  great  revolt.  It  derives  much  of  its  present  importance  from  the 
fact  that  it  is  headed  by  a  man  of  genius  in  the  person  of  Will¬ 
iam  Morris, —  poet,  artist,  and  agitator, —  who  has  nobly  dedicated 
his  splendid  gifts  to  the  cause  of  Socialism.  Allied  to  this  section 
is  one  wing  of  the  Anarchist  party  in  England,  which  also  gains  a 
weight  disproportionate  to  the  small  number  of  its  adherents  from 
its  having  as  chief  spokesman  that  self-sacrificing  and  learned 
Russian,  Peter  Krapotkine.  These  men,  and  others  of  kindred 
temperament,  are  really  the  idealists  of  the  Socialist  movement. 
They  are  consequently  an  invaluable  element  in  it.  It  is  they  who 
help  to  keep  it  from  falling  away  from  its  finer  faith  and  higher 
purpose,  and  from  losing  itself  in  the  machinery  of  politics  and  the 
animosities  of  party  strife.  As  it  seems  to  be  the  inevitable 
tendency  of  political  parties  to  run  into  the  mire  of  intrigue,  mean 
artifice,  and  unworthy  compromise,  an  influence  which  will  aid 
Socialism  in  its  political  activity  to  preserve  a  pure  heart  and  clean 
hands  is  an  influence  to  be  thankful  for. 

Having  cleared  the  ground  somewhat  by  explaining  the  theory 
of  Socialism  and  the  political  attitude  of  its  English  advocates,  I 
may  now  proceed  to  expound  their  practical  programme.  For 
clearness’  sake,  I  will  venture  to  state  again  in  succinct  form  the 
economic  aim  of  Socialism  :  it  is  to  substitute  for  the  present 
regime  of  competitive  .  industry  for  private  profit,  based  on  the 


9 


private  ownership  of  land  and  capital,  a  rtgime  of  co-operative 
industry  for  the  public  benefit,  based  on  the  State  ownership  and 
administration  of  land  and  capital  (not,  be  it  observed,  of  all 
private  property).  This,  as  I  have  already  remarked,  means  the 
appropriation  for  public  purposes  of  the  rent  and  interest  paid 
for  the  use  of  land  and  capital,  which  now  finds  its  way  into 
private  purses.  It  follows  that,  if  the  whole  of  this  rent  and  in¬ 
terest  were  diverted  by  taxation  into  the  public  purse,  there  would 
be  no  further  reason  for  the  private  direction  of  industry.  So  that 
the  final  result  aimed  at  by  Socialism  will  be  equally  effected  by 
these  two  convergent  methods, —  i.e.,  the  gradual  assumption  of 
industrial  functions  by  the  State,  and  the  gradual  public  appropria¬ 
tion  by  taxation  of  rent  and  interest.  But  these  do  not  exhaust 
the  methods  of  Socialism.  Not  only  will  it  work  for  the  gradual 
State,  municipal,  and  township  organization  of  labor,  but  also  for 
the  most  rigorous  State  control  of  private  industry  and  enterprise 
for  the  protection  of  the  worker  in  his  unequal  struggle  with 
capital,  and  in  the  interests  of  the  public  weal.  This  is  at  once 
just,  and  is  needed  to  place  the  worker  in  that  position  of  effi¬ 
ciency  and  independence  which  is  a  condition  of  his  well-being 
and  of  political  and  social  advance.  This  is  the  direction  in 
which  legislation  has  done  most  for  Socialism  in  the  past ;  and, 
as  continuing  a  well-established  precedent,  it  is  this  class  of  leg¬ 
islative  interference  which,  though  it  is  not  most  important,  should 
stand  first  in  the  category  of  Socialist  methods.  Lastly,  with  the 
same  end  of  advancing  the  interests  of  the  workers, —  who  are, 
let  it  be  remembered,  the  overwhelming  majority  of  the  nation, 
—  Socialism  will  strive  for  the  improvement  in  all  possible  ways 
of  the  condition  and  opportunities  of  the  people :  by  their  better 
housing,  by  providing  against  want  during  compulsory  idleness 
(by  affording  work),  during  sickness,  and  in  old  age,  and  by  the 
multiplication  of  the  chances  of  education  and  healthy  recreation. 

Here  let  me  forestall  two  objections  often  made  against  the 
Socialist  position.  The  first  refers  to  the  debilitating  effect  of 
State  interference  and  State  management.  Nothing  could  be 
more  alien  to  the  democratic  object  and  spirit  of  Socialism  than 
the  paternalism  so  often  ascribed  to  it.  Socialism  does  not  pro¬ 
pose  that  anything  should  be  done  by  a  power  outside  or  above 
the  people.  By  the  State,  it  means  the  people  in  their  corporate 
capacity;  and,  by  State  action  or  State  control,  it  means  action 
by  the  people  and  control  by  the  people  of  their  own  affairs,  in- 


10 


stead  of  such  control  and  action  by  a  despot,  a  cabinet,  or  a  class. 
(The  ascendency  of  the  majority  is  of  course  inevitable :  there  can 
be  no  State  and  no  industrial  organization  without  it.)  It  is  the 
endeavor  of  Socialism  to  generate  in  every  man  a  sense  of  his 
representative  character  and  of  his  civic  obligations  and  privileges. 

The  second  objection  I  wish  to  notice  is  that  Socialism  is  unjust 
in  taking  from  the  rich  to  benefit  the  poor ;  is,  in  fact,  a  form  of 
charity, —  compulsory  charity.  This  is  an  objection  which  will  be 
seen  to  be  irrelevant,  if  what  I  have  already  said  has  been  under¬ 
stood.  In  the  view  of  Socialism,  the  taxation  of  land  and  capital, 
by  which  the  State  revenues  for  the  accomplishment  of  its  designs 
are  to  be  raised,  is  simply  a  means  of  restoring  for  public  uses  the 
rent  and  interest  which  are  unjustly  withheld  from  the  people  and 
should  be  employed  for  public  purposes.  It  is  important  to  bear 
this  in  mind. 

I  have  sketched  the  four  kinds  of  legislative  reform  by  which 
Socialism  in  England  hopes  to  work  out  its  ends.  They  are,  to 
enumerate  them  briefly  for  convenience’  sake  :  — 

1.  The  control  of  private  industry  and  enterprise. 

2.  The  gradual  absorption  of  industry  by  the  State. 

3.  The  progressive  taxation  of  rent  and  interest  (i.e.,  of  land 
and  large  incomes). 

4.  The  improvement  of  the  conditions  and  opportunites  of  the 
people. 

The  first  point  to  be  noticed  in  connection  with  these  legislative 
aims  is  that  in  advocating  them  Socialists  are  advocating  nothing 
new,  and  are  not  proposing  to  initiate  any  novel  departure  in  pol¬ 
itics.  The  strength  of  the  position  assumed  by  Socialism  in  this 
matter  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  working  along  the  lines  of  devel¬ 
opment  which  politics  have  taken  ever  since  the  beginning  of  the 
century, —  taken,  not  in  obedience  to  any  well-defined  theory  such 
as  Socialism  claims  to  be,  but  often  in  actual  contradiction  to  the 
dominant  theory,  simply  because  there  was  practically  no  other 
way  of  coping  with  the  evils  of  the  time.  Socialism,  as  you  will 
have  gathered,  aims  to  carry  the  extension  of  legislation  along 
these  lines  so  far  as  to  alter  the  economic  basis  of  social  life.  Its 
affirmation  is  that  the  need  of  such  legislation  in  the  past  is  a 
proof  that  the  economic  or  property  basis  of  our  social  regime  is 
unscientific  and  mischievous.  The  assumption  of  the  champions 
of  laissez-faire  was  that  competition,  with  the  private  ownership  of 
land  and  capital,  would  find  its  own  adjustments,  and  that  the 


self-interest  on  which  it  was  based  would  educe  its  own  checks 
and  insure  social  well-being.  This  assumption  cannot  stand  the 
test  of  economic  analysis.  Early  in  the  century,  it  was  found  that 
the  State,  unless  it  were  to  become  a  party  to  the  wholesale  degra¬ 
dation  and  even  murder  of  men,  women,  and  young  children,  could 
not  “  let  alone,”  but  had  to  put  a  stop  —  to  be  sure,  even  yet,  a 
very  partial  stop  —  to  the  ruinous  tyranny  of  competitive  com¬ 
merce.  And  we  have  accordingly  had  in  England  an  extensive 
series  of  protective  measures. 

According  to  one  school  of  reformers,  of  whom  Mr.  Henry 
George  is  the  distinguished  leader,  the  mischief  is  due  entirely  to 
the  private  ownership  of  land.  These  new  individualists  uphold 
the  private  ownership  of  capital  and,  with  a  few  exceptions,  free 
competition.  But  Socialism  fails  to  see  any  valid  and  essential 
distinction  between  land  (which  often  embodies  a  great  deal  of 
capital)  and  capital.  It  maintains  that  the  monopoly  of  capital  — 
which,  equally  with  land,  no  single  man  made,  and  is,  under 
modern  conditions,  as  indispensable  as  land  for  human  welfare  — 
is  also  an  inevitable  source  of  human  bondage.  It  affirms  that  it 
is  unjust  and  illogical  to  tax  the  rent  of  land  and  leave  untaxed 
interest  on  capital,  which,  like  the  rent  of  land,  is  a  toll  levied 
on  labor  by  monopolists  of  what  is  largely  a  social  product  and 
is  indispensable  to  life.  In  any  case,  it  denies  the  right  of  any 
person,  by  any  monopoly  whatever,  to  withhold  from  labor  any 
part  of  the  fruits  of  its  exertion  and  to  live  in  idleness  on  interest, 
supported  by  the  labor  of  others. 

This,  however,  is  a  digression.  I  will  now  deal  seriatim  with 
each  of  the  four  species  of  legislation  which  I  have  enumerated, 
indicating  briefly  what  progress  has  been  made  in  each  instance, 
and  then  stating  the  fresh  extensions  which,  as  Socialists  believe, 
should  be  immediately  demanded. 

i.  Under  the  head  of  legislation  insuring  the  State  control  of 
private  industry  and  enterprise  for  the  protection  of  the  workers 
and  the  public,  we  have  first  the  series  of  Acts  passed  from  1802 
onwards,  which  regulate  the  employment  of  men,  women,  and 
children  in  factories,  workshops,  and  mines.  .Under  this  category 
are  to  be  included  several  Acts  passed  in  recent  years  (after  the 
cessation  of  such  legislation  during  a  period  when  reactionary  indi¬ 
vidualist  doctrines  held  sway), —  Acts  like  the  Employer’s  Liability 
Act,  protecting  employees  against  accidents  due  to  the  negligence 
or  fault  of  the  employers ;  the  Mines  Regulation  Acts,  protecting 


2 


miners  against  accidents  in  mines  and  abuses  of  employers’ 
powers ;  the  Truck  Act,  providing  for  the  honest  payment  of  wages. 
Besides  Acts  of  this  kind,  we  have  a  series  of  Acts  for  the  protec¬ 
tion  of  public  health,  the  chief  of  which  is  the  Public  Health  Act, 
1875,  which  consolidated  previous  legislation.  By  that  Act  and 
other  minor  incorporated  Acts,  provision  is  made,  among  other 
matters,  for  the  regulation  of  the  construction  of  new  streets  and 
buildings  and  of  slaughter-houses,  of  common  lodging-houses ;  the 
use  of  markets  ;  the  prohibition  of  practices  dangerous  to  health, 
such  as  keeping  animals  near  dwellings  and  offensive  trades ;  the 
plying  of  hackney  carriages  and  of  pleasure  boats  and  vessels, 
etc.  Other  Acts  provide  against  adulteration  and  the  unhealthy 
management  of  dairies,  cowsheds,  and  milkshops.  Then  we  have 
the  Merchants’  Shipping  Act  for  the  protection  of  seamen,  and 
Acts  for  the  control  of  electric  lighting,  telephones,  railway  rates, 
etc.  By  rigid  inspection  and  registration,  the  State  exercises  in 
numerous  instances  controlling  power  of  another  kind.  But  more 
important  than  any  of  these  controls  is  the  power  which,  by  Mr. 
Gladstone’s  famous  Irish  Land  Acts,  the  State  has  assumed  to 
control  rents  in  Ireland, —  a  precedent  that  was  not  lost  sight  of 
when  it  came  to  dealing  with  the  agrarian  grievances  of  the  croft¬ 
ers  in  the  north  of  Scotland.  This  record  will  show  that  not  a 
little  has  been  done  to  curtail  the  power  of  capital  in  its  unequal 
contest  with  labor,  and  to  insist  upon  such  an  exercise  of  indi¬ 
vidual  powers  as  shall  not  endanger  public  health,  safety,  and  con¬ 
venience. 

The  particular  extension  of  State  control  for  which  the  Social¬ 
ists,  together  with  other  reformers,  are  pressing  now,  is  the  limita¬ 
tion  of  the  working  day  to  a  maximum  of  eight  hours.  There  is 
at  present  some  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  practicability  of 
enforcing  such  a  requirement  in  all  cases.  A  modified  proposal 
is  to  enforce  it  in  all  government  and  municipal  establishments,  in 
mines,  and  in  all  licensed  monopolies  (railways,  tramways,  gas¬ 
works,  etc.),  and  in  any  trade  in  which  the  majority  of  workers 
demand  it.  Socialists  know  that,  if  the  industry  of  a  country  were 
properly  organized  and  every  capable  person  shared  the  work  of 
production  and  distribution,  much  less  than  eight  hours’  work  per 
day  would  be  required  from  each  person.  They  regard  eight 
hours  as  the  maximum  which  any  one  ought  to  be  required  to 
work  in  order  to  earn  a  sufficient  maintenance.  Out  of  these  eight 
hours,  the  wage-earner  will,  as  a  rule,  be  working  at  least  two  for 
the  benefit  of  landlords  and  capitalists. 


3 


In  addition  to  this,  Socialists  intend  to  agitate  for  legislation  to 
secure  at  least  one  day’s  holiday  per  week  (not  necessarily  Sunday) 
and  abstention  from  work  on  fete  days  ;  the  abolition  of  night 
work,  as  far  as  practicable,  for  men  and  women,  and  entirely  for 
children ;  and  the  total  suppression  of  labor  by  children  below  the 
age  of  fourteen,  and  protection  of  children  up  to  the  age  of  eigh¬ 
teen.  These  requirements  were  included  in  the  Socialist  pro¬ 
gramme  at  the  recent  Paris  Congress. 

Socialists  recognize  that  much  has  yet  to  be  done  to  benefit 
workers  in  shops,  factories,  and,  above  all,  in  mines ;  and  further 
legislation  for  this  purpose  is  almost  certain  to  be  carried  very 
soon.  These  matters  are  being  looked  after  by  trades-unions  and 
labor  associations,  and  they  will  have  all  the  help  that  Socialists 
can  give.  Radicals  are  already  talking  of  the  application  of  the 
Irish  land  acts  to  Wales,  Scotland,  and  England ;  and  it  is  in  this 
direction,  and  not  in  the  retrograde  proposal  to  establish  a  peasant 
proprietary,  that  the  line  of  advance  to  the  Socialist  goal  lies. 

2.  The  progress  made  in  legislation  of  the  kind  mentioned  in 
my  second  division  —  namely,  legislation  securing  the  replacement 
of  private  industrial  undertakings  by  State  undertakings,  i.e.  by 
the  central  authority  or  by  local  authorities  —  has  been  note¬ 
worthy.  The  most  conspicuous  example  of  a  State  undertaking 
in  England  is  the  post-office.  This  has  been  constantly  enlarging 
its  functions ;  and  it  now  undertakes,  besides  the  transmission  of 
letters,  the  carriage  of  small  parcels,  the  telegraph  business  of 
the  country,  the  banking  of  small  savings,  insurances,  and  limited 
annuities.  The  State  has  also  its  dockyards,  arsenals,  and  victual¬ 
ling  stations,  where  it  builds  ships,  makes  guns,  provisions  vessels, 
etc. ;  it  has  its  Mint,  where  it  fashions  the  coin  of  the  realm  ;  and 
it  has  its  galleries  and  museums,  its  light-houses,  and  its  coast-guard 
and  pilot  services.  The  State  also  manages  lands  and  estates, 
makes  land  surveys,  takes  the  census,  provides  weights  and  meas¬ 
ures,  controls  charities.  The  number  of  its  employees,  excluding 
the  army  and  navy,  is  over  one  hundred  and  thirty  thousand. 

More  important,  however,  than  these  large  functions  of  the 
central  government  are  the  undertakings  of  the  municipalities  and 
other  local  bodies.  Past  legislation  has  provided  for  a  considera¬ 
ble  number  of  these,  and  they  are  being  constantly  added  to. 
Among  the  more  important  matters  in  the  hands  of  local  author¬ 
ities  are :  education  (under  the  supervision  of  the  central  Educa¬ 
tion  Department) ;  the  relief  of  the  poor,  including  management 


14 


of  large  workhouses,  the  supply  of  medical  attendance  during 
sickness,  in  accidents,  and  in  childbirth,  the  apprenticeship  of 
poor  youths  and  young  women,  the  boarding  out  or  placing  in 
families  of  orphans  and  deserted  children,  and  the  emigration 
of  poor  persons ;  the  supply  of  gas  and  water ;  the  construction 
and  maintenance  of  markets,  sewage  farms,  museums,  galleries, 
libraries,  parks,  public  baths  and  wash-houses,  harbors,  piers, 
wharves,  bridges,  roads,  hospitals,  lunatic  asylums,  cemeteries, 
dispensaries,  tramways,  ferries,  dwellings  for  artisans,  the  provi¬ 
sion  of  garden  allotments  for  poor  laborers;  vaccination;  the  pur¬ 
chase  and  sale  of  lands  for  street  improvements,  etc. 

Since  Socialism  is  to  be  chiefly  realized  through  municipal  or 
local  organization,  and  is  averse  to  unnecessary  centralization,  it 
seeks  by  every  means  to  widen  the  sphere  of  public  enterprise  by 
promoting  the  extension  of  the  powers  of  these  local  bodies. 
Nevertheless,  there  are  at  least  two  matters  which  it  thinks  should 
be  undertaken  as  soon  as  possible  by  the  central  executive, —  the 
ownership  and  management  of  railways  and  banks.  As  regards 
municipal  management,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  obvious 
advantages  of  the  public  supply  of  gas  and  water  and  the  provi¬ 
sion  of  baths,  wash-houses,  and  institutions  for  education  and 
recreation  will  lead,  as  Socialists  urge  that  they  must  lead,  to 
further  government  undertakings.  Socialists  have  made  it  a  point 
in  their  agitation  to  advocate  that  the  employees  in  all  these 
public  establishments  shall  be  well  paid  and  considerately  treated, 
—  paid  wages  sufficient  to  insure  a  respectable  maintenance,  and 
allowed  reasonable  holidays. 

The  next  step  in  the  way  of  local  public  enterprise  which  Social¬ 
ists  would  wish  to  see,  and  are  hoping  to  see  taken  soon,  is  one 
in  connection  with  that  most  pressing  of  English  problems, —  the 
problem  of  the  unemployed.  Before  this  problem  the  politicians 
stand  at  present  bewildered  and  helpless.  There  seems  to  be  no 
way  of  dealing  with  it  without  interfering,  in  what  they  fancy  an 
unwarrantable  manner,  with  vested  interests.  But,  vested  interests 
notwithstanding,  the  problem  must  be  solved.  There  are  three 
leading  suggestions  for  dealing  with  it :  first,  that  of  forming 
pauper  or  beggar  colonies,  after  the  model  of  those  in  Holland 
and  Germany  ;  second,  the  organization  of  labor  in  connection 
with  the  English  workhouses,  by  which  these  institutions  may  be 
self-supporting, —  a  remedy  advocated  by  Mr.  Arthur  Mills,  who 
has  propounded  a  plan  in  a  work  entitled  “  Poverty  and  the 


i5 


State  ”  ;  third,  the  proposal  advocated  by  Socialists  for  the  organ¬ 
ization  of  agricultural  and  industrial  armies  under  State  control 
on  co-operative  principles.  Confused  and  timid  as  public  opinion 
is  at  present  on  this  question,  it  is  hardly  likely  that  the  evil  will 
be  dealt  with  at  once  in  any  thorough-going  way,  but  will  for  a 
year  or  two  be  met  in  the  partial  and  unsatisfactory  manner  at 
present  adopted  in  some  instances, —  the  opening  of  stone  and 
labor  yards  by  local  authorities  to  give  temporary  relief  by  pay¬ 
ment  of  very  low  remuneration  for  rough  work  (chiefly  stone¬ 
breaking),  which  avoids  competition  with  private  firms.  Mean¬ 
time,  the  Socialists  will  continue  to  press  for  the  immediate 
employment  of  the  unwilling  idlers  upon  needful  and  contemplated 
public  works,  public  improvements,  and  especially  the  erection  of 
artisans’  dwellings ;  and  they  will  continue  to  agitate  for  the  more 
satisfactory  palliative  described  above. 

Among  the  Acts  recently  forced  by  party  exigencies  out  of  the 
present  Conservative  government  in  England  was  an  Allotments 
Act,  which  empowers  local  authorities  to  purchase  land  to  be  let 
in  allotments  to  certain  of  the  poorer  working  people.  This  was 
a  very  important  concession  to  the  Socialistic  principle.  It  is  true 
that  the  Act  was,  as  might  be  expected,  very  unsatisfactory ;  but 
it  will  no  doubt  be  amended  and  extended  by  the  next  Liberal 
Government.  It  is  the  policy  of  Socialists  to  see  that  every 
advantage  is  taken  of  legislation  of  this  description.  The  diffi¬ 
culty  usually  urged  as  against  an  extensive  acquisition  of  land  by 
public  authorities  is  the  difficulty  of  raising  the  purchase  money, 
seeing  that  taxation  already  presses  so  heavily  upon  the  poor. 
The  difficulty  is  to  be  met  by  a  readjustment  of  taxation,  which 
naturally  leads  me  to  the  third  division  of  my  subject. 

3.  The  third  kind  of  legislation  for  which,  as  I  said,  Socialists 
would  work  is  legislation  for  the  progressive  taxation  of  rent  and 
interest  to  meet  the  expenses  of  government,  and  the  abandon¬ 
ment  of  all  other  forms  of  taxation.  This  means  shifting  the 
burden  of  taxation  entirely  on  the  shoulders  of  the  rich,  with  the 
ultimate  object  of  abolishing  the  class  of  recipients  of  rent  and 
interest  entirely.  Clearly,  then,  the  making  of  the  poor  justly  rich 
will  imply  the  now  unjustly  rich  becoming  poorer, —  poorer,  that 
is,  in  private  possessions,  and  not  in  opportunities  for  noble  living. 
They  would  have  to  forego  their  great  luxuries  (flunkeys,  etc.), 
which,  according  to  the  religion  that  many  profess,  would  give 
them  some  hope  of  heaven ;  but  it  is  clear  that  no  real  good 


1 6 


which  the  rich  now  enjoy,  no  advantage  of  art,  science,  music, 
literature,  entertainment,  will  be  lost  under  Socialism,  which 
would  provide  the  best  of  these  things  for  the  enjoyment  of  all. 

The  principle  of  a  graduated  income  tax  has  already  been  con¬ 
ceded  in  England  by  the  exemption  from  the  income  tax  of  all 
incomes  not  exceeding  ^150  ($750)  per  annum,  and  by  the  im¬ 
position  of  taxes  on  personal  property,  such  as  death  duties.  So¬ 
cialists  would  be  in  favor  of  raising  the  present  limits  of  income 
exempted  from  income  tax,  of  making  the  tax  a  graduated  one, 
and  of  equalizing  and  increasing  the  death  duties.  This  has 
already  been  proposed  by  non-Socialists. 

At  the  present  moment,  the  attention  of  taxation  reformers  is 
chiefly  turned  towards  the  land.  The  immense  increase  in  urban 
rents,  and  the  exorbitant  demands  made  in  numberless  instances 
by  the  ground  landlords  in  London  upon  the  recent  renewal  of 
leases,  has  brought  the  injustice  of  the  individual  appropriation  of 
the  unearned  increment  into  full  relief.  People  have  begun  to  see 
that  the  rise  in  rents  is  due  to  social  causes,  and  that,  as  a  rule, 
the  landlord  has  done  absolutely  nothing  to  merit  the  increment. 
And  so  we  have  now  a  movement,  growing  daily  in  strength,  for 
the  taxation  of  ground  values.  This  is  supported  by  Socialists. 
It  is  contended  that  the  land  tax  should  be  constantly  raised,  so 
as  in  time  to  absorb  the  whole  of  the  unearned  increment,  and 
eventually  all  rent  whatsoever.  Another  proposal  advanced  by 
other  reformers  is  the  special  taxation  of  mineral  royalties ;  and 
in  this,  too,  as  a  requirement  of  the  same  principle,  Socialists 
concur. 

4.  I  come  now  to  my  fourth  division  of  the  legislative  policy  of 
Socialism, —  the  promotion  of  legislation  to  improve  in  all  possible 
ways  the  conditions  and  opportunities  of  the  poorer  citizens.  This, 
I  repeat,  is  not  regarded  as  in  any  sense  charitable  relief ;  and,  in 
taxing  the  rich  for  the  accomplishment  of  this  end,  the  poor  are 
simply  getting  justice.  Here,  again,  Socialism  will  be  developing 
a  species  of  legislation  begun  long  ago.  The  obligation  of  the 
State  to  protect  the  poor  against  extreme  want,  and  itself  from 
the  evils  of  vagabondage,  was  recognized  long  since  by  the  Eng¬ 
lish  Poor  Law.  The  further  necessity  of  protecting  the  poor 
and  the  State  against  the  evils  of  ignorance  was  later  on  recog¬ 
nized  by  the  passing  of  the  Education  Acts.  It  is,  indeed,  now 
coming  to  be  seen  that  the  condition  of  the  survival  of  the  nation 
as  such  in  the  international  commercial  struggle  calls  for  the  tech- 


7 


nical  and  higher  education  of  the  working  population ;  nay,  more 
than  this, —  that  the  good  of  the  nation  as  a  whole,  rich  and  poor, 
can  only  be  secured  by  keeping  the  workers  efficient  in  body  and 
mind.  The  modern  race  for  commercial  supremacy  is  at  last  for 
the  best  educated ;  and  a  high  education  cannot  be  given  to  an 
indigent,  overworked,  underfed  population.  In  the  last  resort,  in 
fact,  selfishness  is  suicidal.  To  the  Socialist,  the  better  care  of 
the  poor  is  not  a  mere  matter  of  expediency :  it  is  a  matter  of 
justice.  For  him  the  argument  from  national  survival  has  no 
ultimate  validity,  since  he  is  in  all  nations  bent,  as  an  essential 
part  of  his  mission,  upon  ending  the  present  international  struggle 
and  establishing  amity  and  co-operation  among  the  workers  of  all 
countries.  He  does  not  believe  in  the  beneficence  of  selfish 
struggle,  but  regards  it  as  subhuman,  and  of  no  further  value  for 
the  purpose  of  realizing  a  true  society.  Socialism  would  entirely 
replace  private  philanthropy  by  State  protection ;  and  it  will 
accordingly  work  for  such  an  extension  of  our  Poor  Law  System 
as  will  insure  the  adequate  care  and  comfortable  maintenance, 
without  any  slur  of  charitable  intention,  of  the  sick  and  incom¬ 
petent  and  aged. 

Something  has  already  been  done  by  legislation  to  provide  by 
public  agencies  for  the  needs  of  the  poor  as  regards  bathing,  wash¬ 
ing,  laundry  work,  education,  and  recreation.  Besides  the  powers 
possessed  by  municipal  and  other  local  authorities  to  erect  dwell¬ 
ings  for  artisans,  they  possess,  and  are  now  more  liberally  using, 
powers  to  construct  public  baths,  wash-houses,  and  laundries, 
libraries,  galleries,  schools,  halls,  and  to  provide  public  parks  and 
recreation  grounds  (wherein  music  is  often  performed  and  games 
are  furnished  at  the  public  expense).  With  this  start  made,  the 
way  stands  open  for  the  speedy  extension  of  public  enterprise. 
Socialists  will  strive  to  hasten  the  time  when  the  poor  shall  by 
these  co-operative  methods  be  better  provided  for  than  the  rich ; 
when  the  facilities  for  washing,  for  cooking,  and  the  other  opera¬ 
tions  of  daily  life  in  which  co-operation  is  possible,  shall  be  greater 
in  the  public  establishments  than  any  private  enterprise  can  pos¬ 
sibly  provide. 

In  the  matter  of  education,  we  have  very  much  more  ground  to 
make  up  in  England  than  you  have  here  in  America.  We  have 
not  yet  secured  free  education,  even  of  the  most  elementary  kind. 
That  is  what  we  are  agitating  for  now,  and  shall  probably  get 
very  soon.  But  this  will  be  only  a  first  step.  We  shall  then  have 


1 8 


to  agitate  for  the  improvement  of  the  elementary  education  as  at 
present  given,  and  for  free  higher  education ;  that  is,  for  free 
public  secondary  and  high  schools.  The  ideal  of  Socialism  is  that 
the  State  (not  necessarily  the  central  authority)  should  supply,  free 
of  cost,  the  very  best  education  that  can  be  given  ;  and  that  this 
education  should  be  continued  until  every  pupil  has  been  fully 
equipped  for  that  calling  for  which  he  or  she  has  been  proved  to 
be  fitted.  In  short,  we  must  work  not  only  for  free  schools,  but 
for  free  universities.  The  great  obstacle  to  such  progress  in  Eng¬ 
land  is  class  distinction.  The  tendency  is  to  provide  separate 
state  schools  for  rich  and  poor ;  for  example,  by  establishing  so- 
called  middle-class  schools.  That  is  the  tendency  we  have  to 
fight  against ;  and,  by  the  introduction  of  a  uniform  school  system, 
to  deal  a  blow  at  the  miserable  class  separation  and  pride  which 
are  the  enemies  of  noble  civilization. 

As  connected  with  the  subject  of  education,  it  should  be  men¬ 
tioned  that  an  important  demand  made  by  advanced  Radicals  as 
well  as  Socialists  is  one  for  the  provision  of  a  free  daily  meal  for 
all  children  attending  board  schools.  At  present,  as  I  previously 
mentioned,  many  thousands  of  school  children  are  unable  through 
sheer  lack  of  food  to  receive  even  the  elementary  teaching  given 
in  the  public  schools;  and  it  is  argued  that,  if  education  is  nec¬ 
essary,  then  it  is  necessary  that  the  scholars  should  be  rendered 
capable  of  receiving  it.  That  is  good  logic  and  good  sense. 

I  have  now  very  briefly  sketched  the  more  immediate  legisla¬ 
tive  reforms  for  which  Socialists  intend  to  work  as  leading  towards 
the  full  attainment  of  their  ideal ;  but  it  needs  to  be  pointed  out 
that  the  political  machinery,  electoral,  legislative,  and  administra¬ 
tive,  as  it  now  is  in  England,  is  very  imperfect,  old-fashioned,  and 
quite  inadequate  to  modern  needs,  so  that  its  improvement  is 
another  matter  for  which  Socialists  are  obliged  to  agitate.  We 
have  nothing  like  the  clear  and  consistent  —  though,  it  would  seem, 
not  wholly  perfect — system  of  the  United  States.  We  have  to 
“  democratize  ”  our  political  institutions,  to  simplify  and  consoli¬ 
date  our  electoral  methods  and  districts,  to  decentralize  and  unify 
administrative  functions.  Hence  Socialists  include  in  their  pro¬ 
gramme  the  following  items  :  adult  suffrage;  the  abolition  of  all 
property  qualifications  and  all  privileges  in  voting  and  in  repre¬ 
sentation  (which  includes  the  abolition  of  that  decorative  remnant 
of  feudalism,  the  House  of  Lords)  ;  the  payment  of  election  ex¬ 
penses  and  of  salaries  to  public  representatives ;  more  frequent 


19 


Parliaments,  probably  annual.  These  reforms  are  not  advocated 
by  Socialists  only.  They  are  included  in  the  recognized  Liberal 
and  Radical  programmes.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  proposal 
to  reform  the  present  anomalous  and  absurd  laws  for  the  registra¬ 
tion  of  voters  and  the  areas  of  electoral  districts,  than  which  noth¬ 
ing  can  be  more  puzzling  and  irrational.  Lastly  there  is  the 
reform  of  local  administration.  At  present,  the  system  is  most 
confused  and  clumsy,  and  only  an  ingenious  mind  can  comprehend 
it.  Local  authorities, —  county,  municipal,  union,  township,  sani¬ 
tary,  highway,  lighting,  education,  etc., —  whose  jurisdiction  extends 
over  different,  overlapping  areas,  have  been  multiplied  until  the 
adjustment  of  their  powers  and  duties  often  perplexes  the  central 
adjudicating  authority,  the  Local  Government  Board.  The  pas¬ 
sage  of  the  Local  Government  Act,  1888,  is  the  first  step  towards 
the  introduction  of  order  into  this  chaos. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  these  political  aims  which  I  have 
outlined  by  no  means  exhaust  the  practical  aims  of  the  Socialist 
movement.  It  relies  on  other  forces  for  the  accomplishment  of  its 
purpose.  I  do  not  speak  of  its  educational  work,  its  propaganda 
at  elections  and  so  forth ;  while,  as  for  its  effort  to  secure  the  elec¬ 
tion  of  Socialists  to  Parliament  and  upon  local  bodies,  that  may 
be  held  to  come  under  the  head  of  political  aims.  (Several  So¬ 
cialists  have  been  elected  on  town  councils,  school  boards,  vestries, 
etc.)  The  leading  principle  of  their  extra-political  work  is  to  fur¬ 
ther  any  movement  that  will  justly  increase  the  power  of  labor 
against  capital.  Therefore,  they  are  anxious  to  do  all  that  can  be 
done  in  the  way  of  strengthening  and  increasing  labor  organiza¬ 
tions,  and  in  assisting  the  workers  in  strikes  and  disputes.  Thus, 
when  the  girls  employed  in  the  great  match  factory  of  Bryant  & 
May  struck  work  last  year,  the  Socialists  took  the  matter  up, 
organized  the  strikers,  moved  public  opinion  in  their  favor,  col¬ 
lected  and  distributed  funds  for  their  support,  and  succeeded  in 
getting  them  to  unite  to  form  a  trades-union.  The  Socialist  to 
whose  untiring  and  judicious  efforts  the  success  of  the  strike  was 
mainly  due,  Mrs.  Annie  Besant,  was  elected  secretary  of  the  union. 
It  was  a  Socialist  who  took  the  directing  part  in  the  recent  suc¬ 
cessful  strike  of  gas  engineers  in  London.  It  is  a  Socialist,  John 
Burns,  who  has  been  the  friend  and  leader  of  the  dock  laborers  in 
their  present  strike.  Annie  Besant,  it  may  be  said,  is  a  member 
of  the  London  School  Board,  where  she  has  a  Socialist  ally  in 
the  Rev.  Stewart  Headlam ;  and  it  was  owing  to  her  that  the 


20 


School  Board  passed  a  resolution  pledging  itself  in  effect  not  to 
give  contracts  to  firms  who  do  not  pay  the  trades-union  rate  of 
wages.  This  was  an  important  point  gained,  and  the  example  of 
this  metropolitan  board  is  almost  sure  to  be  followed  by  other 
public  bodies.  John  Burns  is  a  member  of  the  London  County 
Council,  and  he  will  shortly  try  to  get  that  authority  to  make  a 
similar  regulation. 

The  efforts  of  Socialists  to  promote  the  closer  union  of  the 
workers  are  not  confined  to  England,  but,  as  the  international 
scope  of  the  movement  requires,  are  directed  towards  securing  an 
understanding  between  the  workers  in  all  European  countries. 
This  work  has  produced  good  results,  and  is  fostering  a  sense  of 
international  solidarity,  which,  as  events  have  actually  shown,  is 
leading  workmen  on  the  Continent  to  refuse  to  replace  their  Eng¬ 
lish  comrades  at  lower  wages. 

In  conclusion,  let  me  say  that  Socialism  is  very  much  more  as  a 
revolutionary  force  in  modern  life  than  these  practical  aims  would 
seem  to  imply.  It  has  appeared  as  a  new  hope,  not  only  to  the 
needy  and  baffled  wage-worker,  but  to  many  a  despondent  poet, 
philosopher,  artist,  and  craftsman.  And  thus  it  is  that  the  move¬ 
ment  has  become  penetrated  by  an  inspiring  sense  that  it  is  the 
herald  of  a  nobler  epoch  of  civilization,  the  liberator  not  only  of 
the  down-trodden  people,  but  of  a  corrupted  art  and  literature  and 
religion.  On  all  sides,  men  and  women  are  coming  to  see  that  the 
diverse  evils  and  deformities  of  our  civilization  are  closely  con¬ 
nected  with  a  fundamental  social  injustice,  and  that  no  fair  flowers 
of  life  and  deed  can  spring  from  a  society  that  is  rooted  in  dis¬ 
honor,  in  a  debasing  struggle  for  riches,  and  in  an  estranging  in¬ 
equality.  The  significance  of  Socialism  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is 
at  the  core  the  expression  of  a  new  view  of  life ;  and  yet  not  new 
in  any  absolute  sense,  but  new  to  the  average  conviction  and  con¬ 
science  of  the  age.  At  the  heart  of  it  lies  the  belief  that  we  are, 
with  our  absorption  in  “getting  and  spending,”  missing  the  true 
end  of  life  through  a  foolish  care  for  the  mere  means  of  living. 
This  is  but  to  say  again,  in  the  language  familiar  to  Christendom, 
that  human  happiness  does  not  consist  in  the  abundance  of  pos¬ 
sessions,  and  that  riches  are  a  real  impediment  to  the  higher  life. 

If  there  is  anything  that  convicts  the  modern  world  of  insin¬ 
cerity,  it  is  the  appalling  discrepancy  between  its  profession  and 
its  practice, —  the  root  of  much  prevailing  cynicism  and  infidelity. 
“Ye  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon”;  “a  rich  man  shall  hardly 


21 


enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ”  ;  “  lay  not  up  for  yourselves 
treasures  upon  earth,”  —  reflect  what  a  glaring  unfaithfulness  to 
these  sayings  the  commercial  and  social  life  of  to-day  discloses ! 
Socialism  would  have  those  who  believe  in  such  ideas  turn  and 
be  faithful  to  them.  As  opposed  to  the  present  life  of  struggle 
for  outward  riches,  it  advances  the  ideal  of  a  life  of  co-operation 
for  that  true  wealth  which  is  the  enrichment  of  man’s  mind  and 
heart  with  truth  and  beauty  and  fellowship, —  a  life  not  choked  by 
material  encumbrances,  but  clean  and  wholesome  in  its  refined 
simplicity ;  a  life  which  promotes  the  development  of  manly  char¬ 
acter  and  the  full  fruition  of  human  powers  for  the  good  and  enjoy¬ 
ment  of  all. 


